Legal Opinion
State v. Magaha
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided June 2, 1943No. [No. 17, April Term, 1943.]PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDelaplaine, J.
The State has brought this appeal to defend the constitutional validity of “General Rule Covering the Use of Streets,” in the Traffic Ordinance of Baltimore City. The challenged section provides: “Reasonable care to be used. Nothing contained herein or omitted herefrom shall be construed or held to relieve any person using, or traveling or being upon any street, for any purpose whatever, from exercising all reasonable care to avoid or prevent injury through collision with all other persons and vehicles.” Ordinances of Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 1908-09, Ord. 139; Baltimore City…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Lanzetta v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Nash v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- United States v. L. Cohen Grocery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Bowers v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- Tidewater/Havre De Grace, Inc. v. Mayor of Havre De GraceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- Brehm v. LorenzCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1955
- State of Oregon v. WojahnOregon Supreme Court · 1955
- Alternatives Unlimited, Inc. v. New Baltimore City Board of School CommissionersCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2004
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.